Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
1–10 of 83 posts
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#2...or the playground.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#3Well the consumer most benefits, if companies are continuously innovative, not copying each other and selling for cheaper. This article missed the point. Why doesn't Samsung actually make something better than the iPhone. Not some cheap ripoff.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#4Well the consumer most benefits, if companies are continuously innovative, not copying each other and selling for cheaper. This article missed the point. Why doesn't Samsung actually make something better than the iPhone. Not some cheap ripoff.
What exactly did Samsung copy? The dimensions of an iPad? The API of the iOS touch framework? Either way, they didn't copy the implementation, and they didn't steal what wasn't already publicly known.
Get off your high horse Mr. Harrison. Smell the grass, it's growing everywhere underneath your feet, consuming you.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#5Well the consumer most benefits, if companies are continuously innovative, not copying each other and selling for cheaper. This article missed the point. Why doesn't Samsung actually make something better than the iPhone. Not some cheap ripoff.
I sold my iphone 4s to get a galaxy nexus. I like it way better. It's not a knockoff at all.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#6Well the consumer most benefits, if companies are continuously innovative, not copying each other and selling for cheaper. This article missed the point. Why doesn't Samsung actually make something better than the iPhone. Not some cheap ripoff.
What exactly did Samsung copy? The dimensions of an iPad? The API of the iOS touch framework? Either way, they didn't copy the implementation, and they didn't steal what wasn't already publicly known. Get off your high horse Mr. Harrison. Smell the grass, it's growing everywhere underneath your feet, consuming you.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#7Well the consumer most benefits, if companies are continuously innovative, not copying each other and selling for cheaper. This article missed the point. Why doesn't Samsung actually make something better than the iPhone. Not some cheap ripoff.
you are as confused as Apple legal. Apple's true problem when Samsung "crossed a line" isn't copying: it's brand confusion. The moment Samsung decided that they would sell units by being literally confused for an Apple device that one already knows closely is when they started accruing damages they should now pay Apple in order to make the situation equitable.
This is like Wendy's deciding: "Fuck being third. From now on our logo will be a minimalist W, but upside down, and yellow, and we will not be happy with its form until customers start streaming in at the same rate they do to a McDonald's."
Everyone who brings in prior art is missing an issue. When I first saw an iPad, I wasn't like: "Oh, a Star Trek pad!" But I did look at an iPad and say, oh, an iPad: it was a Samsung designed to confuse the customer into thinking that it was one, by infringing on iPad's design very closely.
Let's be honest. It would have been easy for Samsung to take all the design cues it wanted from Apple while adding enough of their own design so as not to cause confusion. But they chose not to do that. They chose to be confused for an iPad.
Even the lawyers on the case mistake one for the other. But they think that this "confusion" is just an effect of the infringement damage. It's not: it's the source of the infringement damage.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#8Well the consumer most benefits, if companies are continuously innovative, not copying each other and selling for cheaper. This article missed the point. Why doesn't Samsung actually make something better than the iPhone. Not some cheap ripoff.
>> if companies are continuously innovative
Those companies that are continuously innovative have nothing to fear from copycats... because they are always one step ahead of the copycats. Companies which want to prevent everyone from "copying" (going as far as saying that you cannot apply to computers the minimalist style that they didn't even invent[1]) do so because they don't want to innovate -- they want to live large off their past achievements.
>> Not some cheap ripoff.
A cheap ripoff is not even close competition to a well executed product.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly did Samsung copy? The dimensions of an iPad? The API of the iOS touch framework? Either way, they didn't copy the implementation, and they didn't steal what wasn't already publicly known. Get off your high horse Mr. Harrison. Smell the grass, it's growing everywhere underneath your feet, consuming you.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/21/apple_samsung_...
I want to live in a world where this is OK and expected.
I expect competitors to build upon my work and I would love to see them win.
Apple had already won my respect and loyalty with the iPhone and iOS.
They lost my respect when they went against Samsung.
Re: Apple and Samsung Should Fight in the Marketplace, not the Courtroom
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly did Samsung copy? The dimensions of an iPad? The API of the iOS touch framework? Either way, they didn't copy the implementation, and they didn't steal what wasn't already publicly known. Get off your high horse Mr. Harrison. Smell the grass, it's growing everywhere underneath your feet, consuming you.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/21/apple_samsung_...
So wait...are you saying that Apple copied Samsung's "single prominent button beneath a large screen" phone design? The iPhone looks an awful lot like a refinement of the i700, i730 and i830 designs.